(905) 415-1636

Brady Williams: Polygamous Marriage and Spousal Support

TMZ reported this week that Brady Williams, a recent reality TV star, has filed for
bankruptcy. Brady is the head of the Utahan polygamous family featured
on TLC’s reality show ‘My Five Wives’.

As the apt series name suggests, the man has five wives – Paulie, Robyn,
Rosemary, Nonie, and Rhonda – and twenty-four children between them. Brady
is legally married to his first wife of twenty years, Paulie. He has been
religiously married to each of the others for at least fourteen years.
They were all raised and married in a fundamentalist Mormon community,
but have since left the withdrawn from their Church. The large family
shares two houses that have been divided into five separate living spaces for each wife
and her children.

In recent years, reality television following the lives of polygamous lifestyles
has captured public attention. While polygamous marriages are prohibited
in the United States and Canada, there are still those who engage in these
relationships because of their religious beliefs or lifestyle choices.

While there is no reason to think that any of Brady’s wives are planning
to leave him, it would be an interesting exercise to consider whether
their polygamous marriage could preclude them from making a claim for
spousal support in Ontario.

Since Paulie is the only one legally married to Brady, the status of her
marriage is not an issue. She can make a claim under the
Divorce Act or
Family Law Act depending on whether she wanted to divorce or simply separate.

Robyn, Rosemary, Nonie and Rhonda, however, cannot claim under the
Divorce Act. Their religious marriages to Brady are precluded from being legally recognized
under the
Criminal Code and
Civil Marriage Act because of his legal marriage to Paulie.

They may be able to claim support under the
Family Law Act. To do so, each woman would have to establish that they are a ‘spouse’
of Brady. If they succeed, and can demonstrate the necessary entitlement
to support, Brady could be obligated to provide for them to the extent
he is capable of in accordance with
FLA s. 30.

According to
FLA s. 1(1), a spouse is either of two persons who are married to each other. The
FLA includes a clause for spouses of polygamous marriages in s. 1(2) where
a person can be considered a married spouse under s. 1(1) if the polygamous
marriage was ‘celebrated in a jurisdiction whose system of law recognized
it as valid.’ Unfortunately for the Williamses, Utah does not legally
recognize plural marriage and their marriages were entirely religious,
not civil.

While the four women cannot claim to be spouses through marriage, they
could be Brady’s common-law spouses within the
FLA‘s definition of cohabiting spouses. Section 29 defines cohabiting
spouses as either of two persons who are not married to each other and
have cohabited continuously for at least three years, or have a child
together in a relationship of some permanence. Since this definition of
spouse does not require that the cohabiting relationship must be to the
exclusion of others, it can apply to polygamous spouses who meet either
requirement.

As each woman has at least one child with Brady and have been ‘married’
to him for 14 to 18 years, they all meet the definition of cohabiting
spouse under s. 29. Even if there were no children, they been living with
Brady a period of time that is well over the minimum three year period.

Thus, Robyn, Rosemary, Nonie, and Rhonda could all claim spousal support
from Brady as common law spouses. Whether they are entitled to support
is another matter, but the fact of their polygamous marriage will not
be the factor that defeats entitlement.

The deliberately generic wording of
FLA s. 29 is intended to uphold the values of equality and non-discriminatory
treatment enshrined in section 15 of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It ensures that dependent spouses in polygamous marriages will receive
the same benefits and rights as Canadian common law couples in relation
to custody, access, child and spousal support.

For those who are curious, the five women would not be able to claim spousal
support from each other using s. 29. While some may live under the same
roof, each lives a separate life from the other women in their designated
part of the two houses. Thus, while Brady has multiple spouses, the women
only have one.

More From the Feldstein Blog

Ontario Family Law, Translated

The statute is dense. The stakes are personal. These articles unpack the parts clients ask about most.

Case Blog

Razavi v. Golzari 2026 ONSC 2686

Background  The parties met in 2013 through mutual family and friends. Around the same time, the husband purchased a home in his sole name. Shortly after the purchase, the wife ... Read more

July 11, 2026 · 8 min read

Feldstein Family Law Group, P.C.

The Law Is Complex.
The First Step Isn't.

Free, confidential consultation with an experienced Ontario family law lawyer. One call can change everything.

Markham · Oakville · Mississauga · Vaughan

Call (905) 415-1636

Responses within one business day — often the same day.

Our Offices

Serving Families Across Ontario & the Greater Toronto Area

Four Feldstein Family Law Group offices across the GTA — close to where our clients live, work, and raise their families.

Markham

20 Crown Steel Dr Suite 8
Markham, ON L3R 9X9, Canada

Map & Directions

Mississauga

3464 Semenyk Ct Suite 213
Mississauga, ON L5C 4P8, Canada

Map & Directions

Vaughan

3865 Major MacKenzie Dr W Suite 107
Vaughan, ON L4H 4P4, Canada

Map & Directions

Oakville

209 Speers Rd Suite 5
Oakville, ON L6K 0H5, Canada

Map & Directions

Communities We Serve

Feldstein Family Law Group represents clients across the Greater Toronto Area — including Toronto, Markham, Oakville, Mississauga, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Thornhill, Unionville, Stouffville, Aurora, Newmarket, Brampton, Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, Burlington, Milton, Georgetown, Woodbridge, Maple, King City, and the surrounding communities of York Region, Peel Region, Halton Region, and Durham Region.